Catholic Confirmed, but non-believer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many beautiful things about the Catholic church and some people are able to see them and stay with the church and not be bothered very much, if at all, by pedophilia cover-ups or anything else negative that the church has done, or will do.

These people of deep faith are hard to understand by people who seem to have lost the gift of faith, or who have shut it or thrown it away.

Perhaps if people who have given up on their faith spent more time in Church, their faith would return. Why not give it a try?

If a priest raped your child, would you return to the church?

If the answer is no, then you're a fucking hypocrite like the rest.

When you support the church, you approve of the way they handled the cover up. And your Cardinal's Appeal $$$, did just that by making their lives comfortable.

My cousin was raped by a priest and the parish priest spoke out against my aunt and uncle in church. I have seen the worst of this scandal and its cover up. I am still a faithful Catholic because I realize that not all priests are evil. Just as I have seen the worst, I have seen many amazing priests who truly live up to their calling to be faithful, honest and good men.

So you're saying that because not all prests are rapists you'll continue to support the institution that covered up the pedophile scandal at the highest levels?

Bigot = equating millions of people with the bad actions of several thousand.

If the shoe fits. Sort of like saying all Muslims are ISIS sympathizers. That's bigotry similar to the anti-Catholic bigot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Bigot: bigotplay
noun big·ot \?bi-g?t\
Simple Definition of bigot
Popularity: Top 1% of lookups
: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)

That would be you, PP. You make sweeping generalizations about a whole group of people. Says more about your own sickness than about the PP you're attacking.

Signed, not a Catholic myself

?? pp provided data, not generalizations.

BS, and don't be deliberately obtuse.

You're blinded by your hatred. So blinded that you can't distinguish the bad from the charity and good her church also performs in the world. So blinded that you can't distinguish between the offending priests and the much greater body of individual Catholic Church members like PP.

You embody the very definition of bigotry. You are indeed making sweeping generalizations, about PP and all the other members of her church.

Your sort of blind hatred has been responsible for much evil in the world, too. Nobody is excusing those several thousand priests. But you need to stop indulging your need to spew hate. Instead you need to reflect on the terrible things that blind hatreds like yours have wreaked in the world.

Freud called this projection

Freud wouldn't have called that particular post projection. As a Jew, he would have recognized the anti-Catholic bigot's obvious capacity for fascism and hate crimes.

As a physician and psychoanalyst, Freud would be careful not to diagnose criminal behavior over the internet (had there been an internet).

I was raised Catholic and went to Catholic school from K-12. For whatever reason, when you call out the RCC for bad behavior, you get called a bigot.

No, you get called that because you lump all the good Catholics together with the bad priests, you seem rabid, and every time you post we have to wipe the spittle off our screens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many beautiful things about the Catholic church and some people are able to see them and stay with the church and not be bothered very much, if at all, by pedophilia cover-ups or anything else negative that the church has done, or will do.

These people of deep faith are hard to understand by people who seem to have lost the gift of faith, or who have shut it or thrown it away.

Perhaps if people who have given up on their faith spent more time in Church, their faith would return. Why not give it a try?

If a priest raped your child, would you return to the church?

If the answer is no, then you're a fucking hypocrite like the rest.

When you support the church, you approve of the way they handled the cover up. And your Cardinal's Appeal $$$, did just that by making their lives comfortable.

My cousin was raped by a priest and the parish priest spoke out against my aunt and uncle in church. I have seen the worst of this scandal and its cover up. I am still a faithful Catholic because I realize that not all priests are evil. Just as I have seen the worst, I have seen many amazing priests who truly live up to their calling to be faithful, honest and good men.

So you're saying that because not all prests are rapists you'll continue to support the institution that covered up the pedophile scandal at the highest levels?

Bigot = equating millions of people with the bad actions of several thousand.

If the shoe fits. Sort of like saying all Muslims are ISIS sympathizers. That's bigotry similar to the anti-Catholic bigot.

Are you saying that because not all prests are rapists you'll continue to support the institution that covered up the pedophile scandal at the highest levels?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Bigot: bigotplay
noun big·ot \?bi-g?t\
Simple Definition of bigot
Popularity: Top 1% of lookups
: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)

That would be you, PP. You make sweeping generalizations about a whole group of people. Says more about your own sickness than about the PP you're attacking.

Signed, not a Catholic myself

?? pp provided data, not generalizations.

BS, and don't be deliberately obtuse.

You're blinded by your hatred. So blinded that you can't distinguish the bad from the charity and good her church also performs in the world. So blinded that you can't distinguish between the offending priests and the much greater body of individual Catholic Church members like PP.

You embody the very definition of bigotry. You are indeed making sweeping generalizations, about PP and all the other members of her church.

Your sort of blind hatred has been responsible for much evil in the world, too. Nobody is excusing those several thousand priests. But you need to stop indulging your need to spew hate. Instead you need to reflect on the terrible things that blind hatreds like yours have wreaked in the world.

Freud called this projection

Freud wouldn't have called that particular post projection. As a Jew, he would have recognized the anti-Catholic bigot's obvious capacity for fascism and hate crimes.

As a physician and psychoanalyst, Freud would be careful not to diagnose criminal behavior over the internet (had there been an internet).

I was raised Catholic and went to Catholic school from K-12. For whatever reason, when you call out the RCC for bad behavior, you get called a bigot.

No, you get called that because you lump all the good Catholics together with the bad priests, you seem rabid, and every time you post we have to wipe the spittle off our screens.

Try not to let someone have that kind of effect on you. It's not good for the soul. Think of the loving grace of god and the precious, centuries-old traditions of the church that Jesus himself asked his diciple Peter to build and find peace knowing that you're blessed to be a part of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many beautiful things about the Catholic church and some people are able to see them and stay with the church and not be bothered very much, if at all, by pedophilia cover-ups or anything else negative that the church has done, or will do.

These people of deep faith are hard to understand by people who seem to have lost the gift of faith, or who have shut it or thrown it away.

Perhaps if people who have given up on their faith spent more time in Church, their faith would return. Why not give it a try?

If a priest raped your child, would you return to the church?

If the answer is no, then you're a fucking hypocrite like the rest.

When you support the church, you approve of the way they handled the cover up. And your Cardinal's Appeal $$$, did just that by making their lives comfortable.

My cousin was raped by a priest and the parish priest spoke out against my aunt and uncle in church. I have seen the worst of this scandal and its cover up. I am still a faithful Catholic because I realize that not all priests are evil. Just as I have seen the worst, I have seen many amazing priests who truly live up to their calling to be faithful, honest and good men.

So you're saying that because not all prests are rapists you'll continue to support the institution that covered up the pedophile scandal at the highest levels?

Bigot = equating millions of people with the bad actions of several thousand.

If the shoe fits. Sort of like saying all Muslims are ISIS sympathizers. That's bigotry similar to the anti-Catholic bigot.

Are you saying that because not all prests are rapists you'll continue to support the institution that covered up the pedophile scandal at the highest levels?

that pretty much seems to sum it up. There's a reason why ex-catholic is the most popular religion in the US. Some people still stick with it SMH

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many beautiful things about the Catholic church and some people are able to see them and stay with the church and not be bothered very much, if at all, by pedophilia cover-ups or anything else negative that the church has done, or will do.

These people of deep faith are hard to understand by people who seem to have lost the gift of faith, or who have shut it or thrown it away.

Perhaps if people who have given up on their faith spent more time in Church, their faith would return. Why not give it a try?

If a priest raped your child, would you return to the church?

If the answer is no, then you're a fucking hypocrite like the rest.

When you support the church, you approve of the way they handled the cover up. And your Cardinal's Appeal $$$, did just that by making their lives comfortable.

My cousin was raped by a priest and the parish priest spoke out against my aunt and uncle in church. I have seen the worst of this scandal and its cover up. I am still a faithful Catholic because I realize that not all priests are evil. Just as I have seen the worst, I have seen many amazing priests who truly live up to their calling to be faithful, honest and good men.

So you're saying that because not all prests are rapists you'll continue to support the institution that covered up the pedophile scandal at the highest levels?

Bigot = equating millions of people with the bad actions of several thousand.

If the shoe fits. Sort of like saying all Muslims are ISIS sympathizers. That's bigotry similar to the anti-Catholic bigot.

Are you saying that because not all prests are rapists you'll continue to support the institution that covered up the pedophile scandal at the highest levels?

You're talking to me and I'm not Catholic. I simply find it disgusting the way you lump millions of good Catholics--including some wonderful nuns, priests and regular worshippers I've met--in the same bucket as, by your own count, a few thousand bad actors. That's the definition of a bigot and you meet it.

Also, you conveniently smoosh together two apposite ideas. Supporting their church, including the theology, traditions and honorable administrators, is completely different from supporting rapists and those who covered it up. That's a little sleazy of you, no?

[Anonymous]

No -- not lumping them in -- it's easy to distinguish between rapists, supporters of rapists and bystanders. It's hard to understand why the bystanders would continute to stand by, not to mention actively support the putative organization, when they could walk away and meet their spiritual needs elsewhere without the sleaze factor

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No -- not lumping them in -- it's easy to distinguish between rapists, supporters of rapists and bystanders. It's hard to understand why the bystanders would continute to stand by, not to mention actively support the putative organization, when they could walk away and meet their spiritual needs elsewhere without the sleaze factor

And that's your second logical fallacy. You keep asserting the PP you're sparring with is "standing by" or "actively supporting", the rapists. You're lying, because you know that PP doesn't "actively support" the rapists. Bigots like you depersonalize the objects of their bigotry.

Third of your logical fallacies: wouldn't working for change from within be as, or more, effective than "walking away"?

So basically you're relying on sleazy lies to lump PP in with the rapists. Of course, that's what bigots and fascists do.... You're playing straight from the bigot playbook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No -- not lumping them in -- it's easy to distinguish between rapists, supporters of rapists and bystanders. It's hard to understand why the bystanders would continute to stand by, not to mention actively support the putative organization, when they could walk away and meet their spiritual needs elsewhere without the sleaze factor

And that's your second logical fallacy. You keep asserting the PP you're sparring with is "standing by" or "actively supporting", the rapists. You're lying, because you know that PP doesn't "actively support" the rapists. Bigots like you depersonalize the objects of their bigotry.

Third of your logical fallacies: wouldn't working for change from within be as, or more, effective than "walking away"?

So basically you're relying on sleazy lies to lump PP in with the rapists. Of course, that's what bigots and fascists do.... You're playing straight from the bigot playbook.

No logical fallacy: The original reads "actively support the putative organization," not the rapists. All Catholics who are pledging members of the church are supporting the organization, irrespective of their view of rapist priests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No -- not lumping them in -- it's easy to distinguish between rapists, supporters of rapists and bystanders. It's hard to understand why the bystanders would continute to stand by, not to mention actively support the putative organization, when they could walk away and meet their spiritual needs elsewhere without the sleaze factor

And that's your second logical fallacy. You keep asserting the PP you're sparring with is "standing by" or "actively supporting", the rapists. You're lying, because you know that PP doesn't "actively support" the rapists. Bigots like you depersonalize the objects of their bigotry.

Third of your logical fallacies: wouldn't working for change from within be as, or more, effective than "walking away"?

So basically you're relying on sleazy lies to lump PP in with the rapists. Of course, that's what bigots and fascists do.... You're playing straight from the bigot playbook.

No logical fallacy: The original reads "actively support the putative organization," not the rapists. All Catholics who are pledging members of the church are supporting the organization, irrespective of their view of rapist priests.

You understand that it's a huge organization, right? That there are many good aspects along with the bad.

Your all-or-nothing demands are sleazy and illogical. Would you demand all Muslims abandon their faith because they read the same holy book as ISIS? Would you demand that moderate Republicans leave their party because of Trump (although you sound like a Trump supporter, so maybe that's a bad example). Would you demand Patriots fans abandon the team because of Brady? Of course not, that would be stupid. Blaming moderate Muslims for ISIS and moderate Republicans for Trump is flat-out stupid. Further, you want the moderate Muslims and Republicans to stay in their faith and party, respectively, to work for change.

Stop being deliberately obtuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No -- not lumping them in -- it's easy to distinguish between rapists, supporters of rapists and bystanders. It's hard to understand why the bystanders would continute to stand by, not to mention actively support the putative organization, when they could walk away and meet their spiritual needs elsewhere without the sleaze factor

And that's your second logical fallacy. You keep asserting the PP you're sparring with is "standing by" or "actively supporting", the rapists. You're lying, because you know that PP doesn't "actively support" the rapists. Bigots like you depersonalize the objects of their bigotry.

Third of your logical fallacies: wouldn't working for change from within be as, or more, effective than "walking away"?

So basically you're relying on sleazy lies to lump PP in with the rapists. Of course, that's what bigots and fascists do.... You're playing straight from the bigot playbook.

No logical fallacy: The original reads "actively support the putative organization," not the rapists. All Catholics who are pledging members of the church are supporting the organization, irrespective of their view of rapist priests.

You understand that it's a huge organization, right? That there are many good aspects along with the bad.

Your all-or-nothing demands are sleazy and illogical. Would you demand all Muslims abandon their faith because they read the same holy book as ISIS? Would you demand that moderate Republicans leave their party because of Trump (although you sound like a Trump supporter, so maybe that's a bad example). Would you demand Patriots fans abandon the team because of Brady? Of course not, that would be stupid. Blaming moderate Muslims for ISIS and moderate Republicans for Trump is flat-out stupid. Further, you want the moderate Muslims and Republicans to stay in their faith and party, respectively, to work for change.

Stop being deliberately obtuse.

Straw men and False analogies - and the one about Trump is especially off because moderate republicans have not supported Trump from the beginning and are now actively repudiating him and are quite aware (if you read the conservative columnists) that trump could ruin the party.

As for the Catholic church -- the good of the church (e.g., spirituality, traditions, music, ritual) could continue once it was rid of all the corrupt leaders who participated in some way in the pedophilia scandal and after it made retribution to all the children who were abused. That seems only fair and like soemthing an organziation based on the love of Jesus would want to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No -- not lumping them in -- it's easy to distinguish between rapists, supporters of rapists and bystanders. It's hard to understand why the bystanders would continute to stand by, not to mention actively support the putative organization, when they could walk away and meet their spiritual needs elsewhere without the sleaze factor

And that's your second logical fallacy. You keep asserting the PP you're sparring with is "standing by" or "actively supporting", the rapists. You're lying, because you know that PP doesn't "actively support" the rapists. Bigots like you depersonalize the objects of their bigotry.

Third of your logical fallacies: wouldn't working for change from within be as, or more, effective than "walking away"?

So basically you're relying on sleazy lies to lump PP in with the rapists. Of course, that's what bigots and fascists do.... You're playing straight from the bigot playbook.

No logical fallacy: The original reads "actively support the putative organization," not the rapists. All Catholics who are pledging members of the church are supporting the organization, irrespective of their view of rapist priests.

You understand that it's a huge organization, right? That there are many good aspects along with the bad.

Your all-or-nothing demands are sleazy and illogical. Would you demand all Muslims abandon their faith because they read the same holy book as ISIS? Would you demand that moderate Republicans leave their party because of Trump (although you sound like a Trump supporter, so maybe that's a bad example). Would you demand Patriots fans abandon the team because of Brady? Of course not, that would be stupid. Blaming moderate Muslims for ISIS and moderate Republicans for Trump is flat-out stupid. Further, you want the moderate Muslims and Republicans to stay in their faith and party, respectively, to work for change.

Stop being deliberately obtuse.

Straw men and False analogies - and the one about Trump is especially off because moderate republicans have not supported Trump from the beginning and are now actively repudiating him and are quite aware (if you read the conservative columnists) that trump could ruin the party.

As for the Catholic church -- the good of the church (e.g., spirituality, traditions, music, ritual) could continue once it was rid of all the corrupt leaders who participated in some way in the pedophilia scandal and after it made retribution to all the children who were abused. That seems only fair and like soemthing an organziation based on the love of Jesus would want to do.

Not a straw man at all. Most Catholics I know have been concerned from the very beginning of the revelation. You know this. You need to work on your intellectual honesty; intellectual honesty seems to be a big problem for you.

Signed, one of the posters who isn't Catholic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Not a straw man at all. Most Catholics I know have been concerned from the very beginning of the revelation. You know this. You need to work on your intellectual honesty; intellectual honesty seems to be a big problem for you.

Signed, one of the posters who isn't Catholic

But then again, intellectual dishonesty is a really useful tool for bigots who want to demonized a whole group of people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Not a straw man at all. Most Catholics I know have been concerned from the very beginning of the revelation. You know this. You need to work on your intellectual honesty; intellectual honesty seems to be a big problem for you.

Signed, one of the posters who isn't Catholic

But then again, intellectual dishonesty is a really useful tool for bigots who want to demonized a whole group of people.

And accusing someone of intellectual dishonesty and being a bigot and demonizer is just name calling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Not a straw man at all. Most Catholics I know have been concerned from the very beginning of the revelation. You know this. You need to work on your intellectual honesty; intellectual honesty seems to be a big problem for you.

Signed, one of the posters who isn't Catholic

But then again, intellectual dishonesty is a really useful tool for bigots who want to demonized a whole group of people.

And accusing someone of intellectual dishonesty and being a bigot and demonizer is just name calling.

It's the simple truth here.

Bigot: bigotplay
noun big·ot \?bi-g?t\
Simple Definition of bigot
Popularity: Top 1% of lookups
: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the
members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)

Intellectual dishonesty is, obviously necessary to sustain prejudice in the face of contradictory facts.